This document is a page from a legal brief or court opinion (specifically 2012 WL 257568) regarding the 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation. It details procedural history concerning the dismissal of claims against numerous defendants, including Saudi banks (Al Rajhi, SAMBA), organizations (Saudi Red Crescent), and individuals (multiple members of the Bin Laden family). The text discusses the impact of the 'Doe v. Bin Laden' decision on jurisdictional arguments under the FSIA (Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act) and mentions motions to vacate previous dismissals. The document appears to be part of a House Oversight Committee production (Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023376).
This document is a Westlaw printout (dated 2019) bearing a House Oversight Committee bates stamp. It details legal proceedings regarding the 'Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation, specifically summarizing Judge Daniels' 2010 dismissals of numerous defendants (including members of the Bin Laden family, Saudi banks, and other individuals) for lack of personal jurisdiction or failure to state a claim. The text focuses on the legal standards for liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act and the requirement to prove specific intent to support the 9/11 attacks.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity